Sunday 1/26/25
Conference championships games today in the NFL. I expect the Eagles to handle the Commanders and my feelings regarding the Chiefs and Bills remain the same.
The historical trend is that the Chiefs find a way to win and the Bills find a way to lose. Regarding the former, that's a recent years thing, whereas with Buffalo we encounter that theme throughout their history, which is overstating to a degree because that Super Bowl loss against the Giants has much to do with this notion, though of course that has no bearing on now. (And besides--Scott Norwood was set up to fail with that kick, with which he was unlikely to be successful given the kicker he was that season. But we digress.)
These Chiefs are a bit like the 1982-83 New York Islanders. You think the dynasty is on fumes, but turns out fumes can be enough and there might be more gas in there than we realize.
I say this as someone who has written repeatedly about the slippage in Patrick Mahomes' game. He can reverse that trend, but the last two years show a quarterbacking getting worse.
He's not their most important factor anymore, though--or at least not this year. That would be Steve Spagnuolo's defense. This is a historically elite DC. Look at Spagnuolo's career. The Chiefs have had him in place--with all of the stability that brings--because he failed so miserably as a head coach.
Spagnuolo is like Bill Belichick was as a DC--maybe a touch below, but ballpark--if Belichick hadn't gone on to have success as a head coach (and had Tom Brady). The Chiefs lead with their defense now, and Mahomes makes the two or three plays the offense needs to put them over the top. They are tested, they don't beat themselves, and yes, they get calls and for whatever reason, Lady Luck seems to be a Chiefs fan.
All of that can be undone on a Sunday such as this one by Josh Allen and company. That would be no surprise. But it wouldn't be my pick. I've said all year I think the Chiefs will become the first NFL team to go back to back to back. Then, if Mahomes continues to slip--I don't know how serous he is about conditioning and improving and keeping that edge and putting the work in--they'll start to fall back. But I think they have two more victories in them right now.
In terms of my own rooting interest, I don't really care one way or the other. I root for the compelling game. I do like Josh Allen, but I think he can be defensed. Game-planned. But I also think he can find a way to beat your well-designed game plan against him, if that's the kind of day he's having. Not consistently beat that game plan, perhaps, because he isn't consistently great. He reaches levels of greatness in his play. He's consistently important. But there is still variability to his Sundays.
If you think about someone like Peyton Manning--or regular season Peyton Manning, anyway--you got consistent greatness for the most parts. He was very consistent that way. Allen can reach these heights--and have himself a Josh Allen game--but you don't know if he will. Having one today can certainly make for the undoing of the 2024 Chiefs.
In watching the Celtics play the Mavericks last night, I kept noticing how important Porzingis is to them. He's their best low-post player and he can be very silky-smooth shooting threes from the top of the arc. There's more flow, more of a high-low game when he is in the line-up. Greater fluidity.
The reliance on the three will be this team's undoing. That and something is off with their mix. Something has always been off with the Tatum-Brown core mix, and it didn't catch up to them last year in which they also had a neatly paved road to the championship. If ever they were going to win it, it was last year.
When we say such a thing, we're usually talking about a team--and a core--that wins once and no more. They have underachieved this year. But Porzingis is a big factor for them. The problem is that he's hurt all the time. And when he plays, you never know how long you'll have him for.
The Bruins beat the Avalanche 3-1--they must have tacked on an empty net goal after I stopped watching--but even when they win, they are drastically out shot and muster little rubber on goal. For instance, yesterday Colorado had 28 shots--which isn't much itself--and the Bruins had 15.
That's typical of the Bruins I'd say. They don't mount any kind of consistent attack. In order to win, they need a high shooting percentage, and their goalie to make a lot of stops (not in this case, but usually, because they give up plenty of shots). Any three-game win streak for the Bruins therefore becomes quite unlikely.
BC men's hockey--who took over the top spot in the college rankings this past week--beat BU--a top ten team--at Agannis by a score of 6-2 and then 2-0 last night at Conte. I did see most of these games. BU began last evening's contest shorthanded due to a protocol violation--their goalie came out to early for warm-ups. I've never seen that before. The refs always come out first, and this kid was on the ice like a minute before anyone else. Then seconds into the game BC scored.
Conte was sold out for the fifth time this season, and it was quite loud/jumping. This is a great rivalry. It feels like college and winter in Boston and riding the B line to get to campus. As if you're in your own Boston winter world reading a book with a Dunkin' Donuts coffee in hand on the T and then cutting across a quiet campus to head into a rink where an exciting scene is playing out, then departing back into the night, walking with the spires up above you, and getting back on the train. Not much else in college sports feels that way anymore, with this blend of something small-town and insular, but which all of these other people are in on, and that is also nationally "official," if you will, a factor in that season's standings and outcome that also immediately become a part of a historical record that can be referenced--directly ("BU began a game shorthanded against BC in 2025") or indirectly ("Over the last ten seasons, the Eagles and Terriers have split the series, 15-15").
Comentários